Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

PSA: uBlock/AdBlocks on Chrome to lose function thanks to Manifestv3

old.reddit.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 334 posts

Re: PSA: uBlock/AdBlocks on Chrome to lose function thanks to Manifestv3

#131

Post by dessant »

johnchristopher wrote: post #128
dessant wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An extension can steal personal data and manipulate pages with Manifest V3 APIs just like before, it does not become any harder for extensions to compromise browsers. There may be an argument that it becomes a bit less performant to execute the JS required to thoroughly compromise a browser, but I don't think such malware cares about microsecond performance losses.

Then what is preventing adblockers from working ? What's that fuss all about ?

Ad blockers will no longer be able to have granular and complete control over requests. Extensions will still be able to observe requests, but not edit them on the fly based on advanced and dynamic criteria.

Extensions will no longer be able to neutralize all current and future evasion techniques the advertising and tracking industry implements. Ad blocking and tracking protection extensions will be forced to degrade technologically by about 5 years, and then stagnate.

Re: PSA: uBlock/AdBlocks on Chrome to lose function thanks to Manifestv3

#132

Post by politician »

freediver wrote: post #78

If you are on a Mac, I suggest that you try Orion browser (currently in beta) [1]. It is based on WebKit, with a custom port of web extensions API [2]. Not only that it runs Chrome and Firefox web extensions like uBlock Origin but we will be keeping support for Manifest v2. [1] https://browser.kagi.com [2] https://browser.kagi.com/WebExtensions-API-Support.html

It looked cool, but then it’s not open source. Too much risk for a bait and switch.

Re: PSA: uBlock/AdBlocks on Chrome to lose function thanks to Manifestv3

#133

Post by sergiomattei »

coldpie wrote: post #124
sergiomattei wrote: post #114

Is there anything that can be done about this? I'm down to email someone, put up a banner on my website or call, I don't know.

Use a browser that isn't developed by an advertising company.

Good suggestion, but silently switching is giving a pass to this kind of behavior from the market-dominant browser.

Making some noise alongside the switch is a more effective way of preventing user-hostile changes.

Re: PSA: uBlock/AdBlocks on Chrome to lose function thanks to Manifestv3

#134

Post by scrollaway »

jqpabc123 wrote: post #87
scrollaway wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And such practices, based on personalized profiles, should most likely be illegal. (Various other practices like these have been made illegal as well) Personally, I don't care that they're doing this (to me). I care more that they shouldn't be able to legally do it. And also, as other people have said: it's ads that are the problem. Not personalized ads. Ads in general. They're ugly, bad, awful, battery-sucking, head…

Buying and selling personal info is a multi-billion dollar industry with almost no regulation. One of Trump's first acts as POTUS was to allow your ISP to get in on this action.

I should hope not. The US having that kind of legal say in what my ISP in Europe can do would be worrisome.

Re: PSA: uBlock/AdBlocks on Chrome to lose function thanks to Manifestv3

#135

Post by laurent92 »

beervirus wrote: post #6

Color me shocked. Why does anyone use Chrome anymore? Firefox is better in every way, and it isn’t tied to the biggest data harvester the world has ever known.

Firefox show ads for Firefox all the time. The “WE CARE ABOUT YOUR PRIVACY” tab that opens every second time, is the most “big browser” warning to me. Anyone who says so much that they care (while asking me to create an account to upload my browser history, which is the best antipattern in our surveillance states) can’t possibly be honest.

Plus they fire CEOs who are against at-will abortion, so they’re literally against my religion. And they’re not selecting on technical ability but on political opinions.

Re: PSA: uBlock/AdBlocks on Chrome to lose function thanks to Manifestv3

#136

Post by db48x »

oauea wrote: post #120
tomohawk wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

firefox -P [profile name] -no-remote EDIT: or, to bring up the profile manager: firefox -P -no-remote

Do that twice, running two firefoxes using two profiles, then click a link in a third application. This tends to try to launch a third firefox process which hangs for a while then says "application already running". Okay, so you run one of them without no-remote. I had some issues with that, but it mostly works. Now how do you change the default profile? You completely stop firefox, update your shortcuts and finally,…

Navigate to about:profiles and click “Set as Default Profile” for one of them.

Re: PSA: uBlock/AdBlocks on Chrome to lose function thanks to Manifestv3

#137

Post by trzeci »

symlinkk wrote: post #125
tyingq wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's an extension api called onBeforeRequest() that lets Chrome extensions see urls that are about to be requested by the browser. It allows you to examine the url and do whatever code heuristics you want to decide whether you want to block it. Google is removing that dynamic blocking ability and providing you with a way to supply a static list of blocked urls instead. No ability to use code to implement a dynamic…

Why does uBlock Origin need to be able to block things dynamically?

It's impossible to provide a list of all ads urls. Simple RegEx matching works better, but that requires a dynamic approach

Re: PSA: uBlock/AdBlocks on Chrome to lose function thanks to Manifestv3

#138

Post by magicalhippo »

oauea wrote: post #120
tomohawk wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

firefox -P [profile name] -no-remote EDIT: or, to bring up the profile manager: firefox -P -no-remote

Do that twice, running two firefoxes using two profiles, then click a link in a third application. This tends to try to launch a third firefox process which hangs for a while then says "application already running". Okay, so you run one of them without no-remote. I had some issues with that, but it mostly works. Now how do you change the default profile? You completely stop firefox, update your shortcuts and finally,…

I agree this is a pain point when using multiple profiles, and something Firefox should improve.

However it's not a huge issue. Mostly just copy-pasting links from mails etc instead of clicking, which gives the nice benefit of observing which site exactly you're about to visit.

Re: PSA: uBlock/AdBlocks on Chrome to lose function thanks to Manifestv3

#139

Post by db48x »

symlinkk wrote: post #125
tyingq wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's an extension api called onBeforeRequest() that lets Chrome extensions see urls that are about to be requested by the browser. It allows you to examine the url and do whatever code heuristics you want to decide whether you want to block it. Google is removing that dynamic blocking ability and providing you with a way to supply a static list of blocked urls instead. No ability to use code to implement a dynamic…

Why does uBlock Origin need to be able to block things dynamically?

It blocks requests based not merely on the full url, but just parts of it such as the the filename or path, or based on which tab or frame the load is for.

Re: PSA: uBlock/AdBlocks on Chrome to lose function thanks to Manifestv3

#140

Post by forty »

foepys wrote: post #100
Dudemeister_ wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can run the profile manager from the terminal with `firefox --profilemanager` and manage the profiles from there Then you can create separate 'shortcuts' for each profile with this `firefox --profile [path to the profile]`

I have been using this workflow for years now. It separates literally everything: cookies, site settings, window size and position, configuration, add-on settings, etc. This way I can emulate a fresh profile, a restricted profile with tracking protection, and a completely locked down profile with more or less everything disabled. My private Firefox in completely unaffected by my development profiles and I can open mu…

How do you choose in which profile links from outside of the browser should open?
Post reply on HN